TMEHpodcast

So from what I understand from this theory, a smartphone carries more "temporal weight" than a simple molecule based on its assembly history.

Feels complementary to quantum emergence rather than contradictory. Maybe quantum correlations create the substrate for temporal experience, while assembly complexity determines how much temporal depth objects carry within that framework.

Both treat time as emergent from physical processes rather than fundamental, just at different scales.

Thank you so much for the kind words—this made my day. Would it be alright if I quoted this on the website? It really captures what the podcast aims for.

This is fun and addictive! Feature request: Bonus points if you know where you are (geo-guesser-like)

Yes, in this quantum scheduling system, all the potential meeting attendees would exist in superposition, simultaneously traveling to Conference Room A, Conference Room B, and the Zoom link that nobody can find. Only when someone actually arrives and observes the meeting does the wave function collapse, confirming which reality we're all stuck in.

The "ghost workers" headed to the non-realized meetings don't disappear though - in many-worlds, they just continue existing in parallel branches where they're attending completely different meetings about completely different quarterly projections. Somewhere there's a universe where your 2 PM budget review became a 2 PM birthday party because Karen from Accounting collapsed the wave function by showing up with cake instead of spreadsheets.

Probably subconscious. I tend to use "instant" when trying to sound more technical/physics-y and "moment" when being more conversational. If time is emergent, both words are describing the same phenomenon.

It's like the difference between saying "temporal coordinate" versus "when", one sounds more scientific but they're pointing at the same thing.

OP here. This is a blog post for a science comedy podcast, so the science is accurate but delivered with about 47% more workplace humour than you'd find in Physical Review Letters.

The core premise is based on real, cutting-edge physics research, though it's still an active area of debate.

The Page-Wootters mechanism (proposed in 1983, experimentally validated by Moreva et al. in 2013-2015) does show that time can emerge from quantum entanglement between subsystems. In their experiments, time exists for observers inside entangled quantum systems but not for external observers viewing the whole system.

The Wheeler-DeWitt equation really does lack a time parameter, creating what physicists call the "Problem of Time" in quantum gravity. And there is genuine convergence across string theory, loop quantum gravity, and causal set theory toward "emergent spacetime" models.

However, this doesn't mean time is "fake", it suggests time might be like temperature, which is real and measurable but emerges from more fundamental processes (molecular motion). The research indicates time could emerge from quantum information rather than being a fundamental dimension.

The 2023-2025 research I mentioned (cosmological time dilation measurements, atomic clock advances) is real, though the interpretation that "consciousness creates time" is more speculative than the underlying quantum mechanics. So yes, "emergent time" is a serious scientific hypothesis with experimental support, but science is still figuring out exactly what that means for our understanding of reality.

The Page-Wootters mechanism (proposed in 1983, experimentally validated by Moreva et al. in 2013-2015) does show that time can emerge from quantum entanglement between subsystems. In their experiments, time exists for observers inside entangled quantum systems but not for external observers viewing the whole system.

This is a blog post for a science comedy podcast. And yes, in a closed system, time is durational.

Subtly but in this case it’s about Page-Wootters specifically

Entropy definitely gives time a clear arrow/direction (why we remember past but not future), but entropy itself is statistical/emergent from many particles.

So we might have time's flow emerging from quantum correlations while time's direction remains real due to thermodynamic entropy. It's like asking if "up" exists, gravity creates real directional asymmetry even though "up" emerges from mass distributions.

Maybe time's arrow is real even if time's existence is emergent? Though honestly this is where my physics knowledge hits its limits!

Caveat, this is a blog post for a science comedy podcast.

The actual science is much simpler than that comedic explanation: recent experiments suggest time emerges from quantum entanglement between particles/systems. When quantum systems interact and become correlated, observers inside those systems experience what we call "time." External observers see the whole system as static and timeless.

But that's about measurement and observation in physics experiments - not about consciousness being special or rocks having "experiences" or the universe being some kind of cosmic computer.

Great catch. You're absolutely right, that phrasing was misleading in a way that accidentally privileges consciousness over other physical processes.

Pfft. Obviously the funniest, most educational science podcast on the planet https://multiverseemployeehandbook.com/

I’m surprised there would be any skeletal remains at all after 400+ years. The article is light on science but the original paper mentions Isotopic analysis which is very interesting.

So the same force that makes your hair stand up after rubbing a balloon against your head helps create planets.

Loved the bit where he said “It always says people are better than me. I find this motivational.” The Office vibes

We considered building a model for cats, but every time we activated the mic, they blinked slowly, knocked it off the table, and stared at us like we’re the ones who needed retraining.

Crypto mining entrepreneur Chun Wang bank-rolled the mission. First ever human space flight to orbit directly over the North and South Poles.

Counterpoint to your comment: Mechanical calculators were cheaper, more reliable, and well understood. Early computers were bulky, expensive and needed a skilled team to operate, until they transformed everything. Quantum tech may follow the same arc.

I find it wild that we’ve been using triangular reckoning (parallax) for over a millennium, all the way back to early mariners. Measure two angles, draw a triangle, know where you are. That same method now maps galaxies. We’re still navigating the unknown with geometry.